>>601347 >fake patriarchy >even though Saint Andrew was the first Patriarch
>get given governmental power and a state by Germanics >introduce filioque as thanks >decide the Pope is Roman Emperor now and literally forge a document to try to validate it >become power-mad and fall to your knees before Satan when he dangles Third Temptation in front of you >refer to those who say, "Nah, that's not how it works" as schismatics.
>>601423 We don't consider the Bishop of Rome as a valid successor of Peter ever since the See was used to push the filioque; that is heretical, and you can't call yourself a valid successor when you're propagating heresy. If the Pope repented, of course, and converted to the Orthodox Church, then he'd be the successor to Peter.
>>601432 Is it possible then that any Eucharistic miracles found within Catholic sacraments may be demonic? I ask because one of the reasons I am looking into the Christian faith is because of witnessing a photographic miracle during an adoration of the Eucharist at a Catholic retreat.
>>601451 The reason I'm asking your opinion is because I'm trying to determine which faith is closer to the true faith preached by Jesus. I don't want to practice Catholic sacraments if they are not valid.
>>601457 The Orthodox Church is the very Church Christ founded, full stop.
I personally do not think Catholics are going to hell, if that is what you're asking, even though they have blatantly practiced invalid Sacraments sometimes (they excommunicated any priest that gave the Blood of Christ to the Communicants for quite some time, and we think the Blood is vital to the Sacrament's validity, but they don't do this anymore). But I do not think that as soon as they Schism'd, all of Western Europe was damned. That's just ridiculous. I do not think the Church of Rome is Christ's Church, but Catholics have an at least impaired communion with Christ, and the idea that they would be damned for not being Orthodox doesn't strike me as feasible.
>>601493 Q1: Concerning the Trinity as polytheism, as doctrine of aspects, Sabellianism, is considered heretical.
A1: The Greek terms used here (οὐσία and ὑπόστασις) are generally translated as “being” and “person”, but can also be translated as “essence” and “existence”, so God is one essence with three distinct (though not separate) existences . According to Hebrews 1:3, the Son is not merely an εἰkών (generally translated as “image”) of God, as man is: He is a χαραkτήρ (which means perfect replication) of God’s ὑποστάσεως; so the Son, being a perfect replication of God’s existence, means HE IS (YHWH is archaic Hebrew for “HE IS”); so God the Father begets God the Son, but does not create him, because that would conflict with the Son being a perfect replica of God’s existence, as God’s existence doesn’t begin or end, and is uncreated; the Son also cannot be a distinct being from God, as God’s essence is predicated upon his existence (ὑπόστασις means the underlying support--I AM). So first of all, ask, “Could God furnish (not create, as God is uncreated) a perfect replica of himself?” Then ask what that would entail, and you get the Trinity. Now of course you might ask, “Why would God do that?” Well, even putting aside the divinity of Christ, the Trinity is fundamental to the Christian conception of God as love, and this explains why: http://www.antiochian.org/node/17594 This is all beyond really putting into words except in the vaugest of senses, but it makes more sense when factor out spatial and temporal conceptions, though it nonetheless remains a divine mystery.
You know, I'm worried you're getting the impression that I'm trying to pull a Pharisee on you with these questions. It isn't the first time I've perceived this while talking with you. I want you to know that I'm trying to determine which faith is the one Christ wants me to practice, which I would imagine is the true one. I figure I owe Him that; I don't want to half-ass this. When I asked you about whether the miracle I witnessed might have been demonic, I meant it might have been an effort by Satan to full Catholics into believing they weren't heretical in their beliefs so I wouldn't be fooled by it. I wasn't trying to trick you into antagonizing decent and pious Catholics. Thanks again for your response.
>>601533 I'm not going to accuse Catholics of having demonic miracles, since Catholics generally consider the Holy Fire to be a legitimate miracle.
I don't know enough to comment specifically one way or the other about whatever you witnesses, but I do know that jumping to, "If it's Roman Catholic, it's demonic," is a Protestant thing, not an Orthodox thing.
>>601620 We didn't add a filioque to gratify the emperor in exchange for worldly power. Neither was the emperor ever considered to have the power to make infallible proclamations about faith or morals.
>>601613 The Pope isn't Caesar. There already was a Caesar when the Pope started promulgating the Donation of Constantine. It would be like if Saint Peter started proclaiming he was Emperor of the Roman Empire and all Christians must support him in this, think about how he'd respond if you recommended this idea to him.
>>601631 >We didn't add a filioque to gratify the emperor in exchange for worldly power. Neither was the emperor ever considered to have the power to make infallible proclamations about faith or morals. >what is iconclasm
>>601666 You have religious art, but no art you use for Liturgical or Sacramental purposes. Do you use an icon of Christ for confession? Do you kiss the hand of the Blessed Virgin when entering Church? Do you have icons on your rood screen? Do you have icons in your home that you venerate? Do you have a procession of icons?
You don't have icons anymore, as the term was understood during the iconoclast crisis.
>>601694 A lot of icons are actually created in 3D. Also, the reason for use of icons over statues is because they're supposed to look a little strange in order to act as "windows to the other world," they're there to remind you that Heaven is very much real and otherworldly. You don't get the same effect from statues.
>>601691 Reformation, I think, judging from the restoration St. Teilos Church, which had a lot of iconography until then.
It's really too bad that the West stopped being Orthodox, some Western styles of iconography are super dank. If they were still Orthodox today, Roman Catholic walls would be covered with Medieval style artwork.
>>601751 Is that church in use? Also do you have any idea of how Western Rite Orthodoxy is doing in Europe? I only know of parishes in the USA. Do you know to what extent Latin and/or Gregorian chant are used in Western Rite Orthodoxy?
The Latin church has done a lot to damage its own aesthetics, comparing music, art, architecture, etc. even pre and post 1960s-1970s is just depressing.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.